Janes Aircraft - Whitehead as the Father of Flight

[Noha307]

How about we talk about Welch vs. Yeager?

Sorry mate, but I have to go with Mutke.

[old iron]

An update on this issue:

About a year ago a German named John Brown claimed to have found evidence that a picture included in a picture of the displays at a 1906 aeronautical exhibit showed Gustave Whitehead in flight. The editor of Jane’s supported this claim. There was some discussion on this thread on the issue.

Some interesting research has come to light. The picture (within the picture) has now been I think conclusively shown to have been part of the John Montgomery exhibit, next to the Whitehead display, and that the picture in question is of a 1905 glider built by John Montgomery, and thus not a picture of Gustave Whitehead. This has long been the chief claim that there ever was a picture of real flight. The evidence now more conclusively than ever says that there was no picture, and was no flight.

This has resulted in interesting articles and statements put out by the Royal Aeronautical Society, Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-debunks-claim-gustave-whitehead-was-first-in-flight/, and others.

The photo in question is evaluated at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/challenges.html, a nice debunking of the Gustave Whitehead conspiracy theory can be found at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/index.html, and a list of unanswered questions about Whitehead can be seen at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/challenges.html.

It is interesting to see that news that the issue has been solved has not received much of the press that happened when the Jane’s claims were made a year ago. No word on when the Connecticut legislature will rescind the measure they passed that Whitehead was first.

[TAdan]

An update on this issue:

About a year ago a German named John Brown claimed to have found evidence that a picture included in a picture of the displays at a 1906 aeronautical exhibit showed Gustave Whitehead in flight. The editor of Jane’s supported this claim. There was some discussion on this thread on the issue.

Some interesting research has come to light. The picture (within the picture) has now been I think conclusively shown to have been part of the John Montgomery exhibit, next to the Whitehead display, and that the picture in question is of a 1905 glider built by John Montgomery, and thus not a picture of Gustave Whitehead. This has long been the chief claim that there ever was a picture of real flight. The evidence now more conclusively than ever says that there was no picture, and was no flight.

This has resulted in interesting articles and statements put out by the Royal Aeronautical Society, Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-debunks-claim-gustave-whitehead-was-first-in-flight/, and others.

The photo in question is evaluated at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/challenges.html, a nice debunking of the Gustave Whitehead conspiracy theory can be found at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/index.html, and a list of unanswered questions about Whitehead can be seen at http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/challenges.html.

It is interesting to see that news that the issue has been solved has not received much of the press that happened when the Jane’s claims were made a year ago. No word on when the Connecticut legislature will rescind the measure they passed that Whitehead was first.

Thanks for sharing that Kevin. I think the Scientific American article covered it nicely.

[old iron]

My previous message has an incorrect link. The report on the photo to be of the Montgomery glider is to be found here

http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwinfo/newphoto.html

The interpretation by the Gustave Whitehead advocates can be seen here

http://www.gustave-whitehead.com/history/detailed-photo-analysis/

[phil65]

Killjoy....

[Warbird Kid]

Listen, as a Whitehead advocate I cannot be so passionately blind to the point that I don't recognize further evidence brought up by other sources. It sure seems logical and practical. So maybe this photo was of another aircraft and not of Whitehead's. Maybe John Brown was wrong in this instance. Maybe.. But I will tell you that just because this one attempt at trying to find a photo of Whitehead flying, shouldn't mean that we throw the whole debate out just like that. There have been hundreds of hours of notable and definitive research that has gone into Whitehead's claim. Countless first hand accounts, affidavits, sworn testimonies, etc. that report he flew first. But for our instant modern society it all comes down to that one picture to convince everybody, which I understand.

[aerovin]

I have not seen mention of this here but I thought it should be mentioned that the American Aviation Historical Society (AAHS) had a article in the last Journal (Spring 2014) by Col. H. Larry Elman that details a long-running dispute within the Connecticut Aeronautical Historical Association that began in 1968 when he was a member of the board of directors. It provides some background information and indicates that there are sealed files held by the group (sealed at the insistence of Whitehead first-flight advocates) of the results of an Investigative Committee that deeply reviewed the Whitehead claims.

An excerpt from the article:

Some months before I was elected to the CAHA BOD,
the BOD created an Investigative Committee specifically
charged with examining the Whitehead claims. Appointed to
that committee were several aeronautical engineers, a number
of pilots, some historians, and William O’Dwyer. Except
for O’Dwyer, members were chosen specifically because, in
addition to their professional skills, they were open-minded on
the Whitehead question. O’Dwyer was a BOD Member from
Bridgeport, a fervent Whitehead fan, and the representative of
Stella Randolph, the author of the 1937 biography of Whitehead.
The committee met for quite some time – approximately a year.
Eventually, its report was presented to the BOD. I was present
for that presentation and discussion.
The report was near-unanimous in rejecting all of
Whitehead’s claims. I say “near unanimous” because every vote
was completely unanimous except for the opposition vote of
William O’Dwyer. O’Dwyer was invited to submit a Minority
Report. I do not remember if he did. The reasoning behind
every conclusion was provided to the BOD, in O’Dwyer’s
presence, and he was given the opportunity for rebuttal.
However, no copies of the report were allowed to be removed
from the meeting on advice of CAHA’s Counsel. O’Dwyer and
his lawyer were threatening legal action, and the release of the
report was an issue in the case. The BOD discussed this aspect
in some detail, and it was obvious that the other members of
the BOD disagreed with O’Dwyer’s actions and supported the
Committee Report. .

Elman states this investigative report and the CAHA supporting documents on Whitehead are sealed to this day due to a legal agreement made at the insistence of O'Dwyer. I am sure this is a very touchy subject for CAHA (and, now, probably Jane's) but bring it up here to add to additional information and background. A link to the AAHS site for those who want to look a bit closer....http://www.aahs-online.org/journals/journal_template.php?vol_no=v59n1#Article9

[airnutz]

Good reading guys, thanks for the updates!